It is not possible for the global economy to function without experiencing any crises in its current state. In order to avoid crises as much as possible, economy needs a market mechanism which can balance income distribution over time. As an economist, I argue that firstly the market itself should be regulated to achieve such a mechanism. Contrary to popular belief, it is a basic wrong to lean on the state and make it the center of economy in order to protect the rights of the poor and the oppressed. As the market is purified of monopolized structures, irrespective of whether they are public or private, and made a sphere of fair competition, income distribution will enter a recovery trend in the course of time.

The recent history of the current system is full of similar examples. For instance, the New Deal period that followed World War II is, at some point, a period of struggle with monopolistic and oligopolistic structures of the past. You cannot build a new and fairer structure without fighting these in a resolute manner.

The first requirement of a properly-functioning market, which works for the good of the producing majority rather than the minority in all topics, including pricing and resource allocation, is absolutely free market entries and exits. A market where monopolies prevail, regardless of whether they are public or private, is not a market in real sense and entries and exists in such markets are at the helm of a dominant minority. As such, it is not possible to allocate resources in an efficient way and in line with competition, which prevents true pricing. Consequently, we face an economy where income distribution increasingly deteriorates. In his "Capital in the Twenty-First Century", Thomas Piketty explains this with the "r<\#62>g" pattern (where r stands for the average annual rate of return on capital, including profits, dividends, interest, rents, and other income from capital, expressed as a percentage of its total value, and g stands for the rate of growth of the economy, that is, the annual increase in income or output). This means that the annual rate of return of the monopolized capital, including profits and interests, continuously surpasses the average annual income of production and producing segments. In other words, capital grows more rapidly than the growth itself and suffocates the market. This is the root cause of crises and such overwhelmed markets succumb to criminal structures after a while.

The fire in the Middle East is essentially driven by the aforementioned reasons. Rami Makhlouf, the cousin of Syrian President Bashar Assad, was the wealthiest businessman in Syria and without receiving permit from the Makhlouf empire, no one could enter Syrian market and invest in key sectors. Likewise, no one can enter Iranian market without receiving permit from Bonyads - so called charitable trusts - which are in the grip of the regime's leading families - particularly the Rafsanjami family in Iranian mullah dictatorship. This state did not go against the course of capitalism but markets. The current crisis has revealed that a kind of capitalism, which was based on state and monopolistic structures, would not last long and it would collapse and entrap everyone.

This being the case, there is a prevailing understanding that even if it falters, market must be operated in places which are not even acquainted with a true market mechanism in order to fight off the chronic aspect of crisis. To this end, developing countries have started to put competition and anti-monopolistic laws in force and non-market dictates like Syria and Iran are disbanding.

Certainly, this is a good development for the region and humanity. The Syrian civil war is the work of the Ba'ath dictatorship. The territorial integrity and welfare of Syria is only possible with a properly-functioning market economy. The fact that Iran has brought its nuclear work under the world's supervision and inked a nuclear deal with the West is a major development, but Iran must construct a true market economy not to allow the regime to continue as a threat. An economy where market entries and exists are free and investor safety is ensured will enable Iran to integrate into the system in real sense.

For three days, Turkey has been preoccupied with the judiciary's assignment of trustees to the subsidiaries of Koza İpek Holding, a Gülen-affiliated conglomerate. The expert report, which justifies the court's assignment of trustees, indicates an appalling story of criminal monopolization. Moreover, we face a global-scale illicit money traffic, which, the prosecutor's office claims, leans on a terrorist organization that has threatened the state for a long time and nourishes that terrorist structure. The prosecutor's office has found with strong suspicion that the Koza İpek group serves under the the Gülenist Terror Organization (FETÖ).

If this structure is allowed to survive in economy in its current state, this means that Turkish economy is a field where criminal structures prevail and do whatever they want and that only those who are given permit by them can enter this market. Such structures have gained so much strength that you cannot easily push them out of the market. So, will Turkish economy be submitted to a crippled market where only criminal monopolies enter and never exit? Or, will the judiciary pave the way for these structures as in the past? Obviously not. As opposed to what this crime syndicate claims, the judicial intervention in this criminal structure is not an intervention in media and press. Actually, this is a step taken to purify the media of this criminal enterprise.

Everyone must make sure that Turkey will be a country whose market is cleared of criminal structures, mafia organizations and gangs that finance terrorism like FETÖ. Those who do not support Turkey's struggle with FETÖ and distort Turkey's efforts to this end cannot talk about true democracy and market. It should be noted that as Turkish market is cleared of monopolies serving under FETÖ, Turkey's market mechanism will be run in a more healthy way. This also means confidence and stability for foreign investors.